Grok 4.7 (High) vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (High) by SpaceXAI or Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Grok 4.7 (High) scores 5.2 points higher (46.3 vs 41.1) but costs 3.8× as much to run the benchmark ($3881 vs $1015; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.7 (High) when you need intelligence above 41.1, and Ling 3.1 Flash when 41.1 is enough.
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (High) | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.3 | 41.1 | −11.2% Ling 3.1 Flash is 11.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,880.88 | $1,014.56 | −73.9% Ling 3.1 Flash is 73.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 25.34s | 13.66s | −46.1% Ling 3.1 Flash is 46.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Ling 3.1 Flash vs Grok 4.7 (High): 11.2% less intelligence, 73.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 46.1% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Grok 4.7 (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
- Ling 3.1 Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Grok 4.7 (High)Ling 3.1 FlashToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7-high/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7-high/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill